Skip to comments.
Connecticut Limits Number of Handguns Law-Abiding Citizens Can Purchase
The Hill ^
| 10/02/2023
| AWR HAWKINS
Posted on 10/02/2023 11:26:20 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
On Sunday, Connecticut’s new gun control limiting the number of handguns a law-abiding citizen can purchase each month went into effect.
NPR reported that State Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney (D) praised the new restriction but is not satisfied with it. He “wants to pursue further limits on monthly gun purchases.”
Looney also wants to secure a microstamping requirement in Connecticut.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Government; US: Connecticut
KEYWORDS: banglist; citizens; connecticut; handguns; policestate; purchase
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
None of your dang business how many guns people buy legally
To: ChicagoConservative27
Citizens should limit the number of words their civil servants can say.
2
posted on
10/02/2023 11:28:54 AM PDT
by
MtnClimber
(For photos of Colorado scenery and wildlife, click on my screen name for my FR home page.)
To: ChicagoConservative27
So many of these Blue States really need a flushing...or a Nuke.
To: ChicagoConservative27
Odd, no limits on how many violent criminals can own.
4
posted on
10/02/2023 11:31:13 AM PDT
by
Dutch Boy
(The only thing worse than having something taken from you is to have it returned broken. )
To: ChicagoConservative27
Of course if your state says you can buy one a month, then you should honor their recommendation and purchase one a month. Actually makes it easy to budget that way... :)
5
posted on
10/02/2023 11:31:28 AM PDT
by
Magnum44
(...against all enemies, foreign and domestic... )
To: dpetty121263
What the need is for the SCOTUS to rule that they have acted in bad faith wrt 2nd amendment rights passing laws they knew to be unconstitutional. As such, they should be required to get pre-clearance from the federal courts in order to enact any gun legislation at all.
6
posted on
10/02/2023 11:31:52 AM PDT
by
FLT-bird
To: ChicagoConservative27
Also, they "did away" with open carry (now concealed only).
Feel safer now?
7
posted on
10/02/2023 11:32:02 AM PDT
by
Psalm 73
("You'll never hear surf music again" - J. Hendrix)
To: ChicagoConservative27
so, did they pass any legislation limiting the number of firearms the “non law abiding thugs” can own?
Asking for a democrat friend who believes laws aren’t written for them.
To: ChicagoConservative27
Hey Looney—try that in a Red State.
9
posted on
10/02/2023 11:33:51 AM PDT
by
DaBroasta
("An armed society is a polite society" Heinlein)
To: ChicagoConservative27
We need to restrict free speech: One word per month for any elected official.
10
posted on
10/02/2023 11:34:10 AM PDT
by
CodeToad
(Arm Up! They Have!)
To: ChicagoConservative27
And exactly how does this reconcile with the explcit constituional language of “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed?” Friggin’ libtard filth...
To: ChicagoConservative27
Can’t limit how many guns a month they can lend or borrow though. Let’s start a “gun library”.
To: FLT-bird
But who will enforce these rulings? DOJ, Congree, the Executive Branch?
To: ChicagoConservative27
This is unconstitutional and WE JUST HAD A SUPREME COURT DECISION on this...
14
posted on
10/02/2023 11:39:01 AM PDT
by
Mr. K
(No consequence of repealing Obamacare is worse than Obamacare)
To: MtnClimber
Citizens should limit the number of words their civil servants can say. Yeah, it is pretty obvious.
My take was, "Then despite the lstA, they believe they have the right to limit the number of unoffensive words one can speak during a 30 day period."
15
posted on
10/02/2023 11:41:20 AM PDT
by
frog in a pot
(Open borders are a very cost-effective and certain way to dilute a nation's culture. )
To: MtnClimber
Citizens should be able to deduct pay whenever Legislator enacts anything that limits our Constitutional rights. In about 2 weeks they’d be at $0 salary, and at 4 weeks they’d be far indebted to us.
16
posted on
10/02/2023 11:44:14 AM PDT
by
Made In The USA
(Ellen Ate Dynamite Good Bye Ellen)
To: ChicagoConservative27
17
posted on
10/02/2023 11:46:47 AM PDT
by
No name given
(Anonymous is who you’ll know me as)
To: ChicagoConservative27
Connecticut is New York’s ‘Mini-Me’...................
18
posted on
10/02/2023 11:46:55 AM PDT
by
Red Badger
(Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegal aliens are put up in hotels.....................)
To: ChicagoConservative27
Sure glad my state's interpretation of the same constitution is a bit different. Hopefully the supreme court quickly slaps this down, maybe takes a broader approach that all state and local laws are void as infringement on the constitution.
Can I under similar interpretation, make only one online 1st amendment statement per month?
19
posted on
10/02/2023 11:47:17 AM PDT
by
Reno89519
(DeSantis 2024. Successful Governor, Honorable Veteran, Respectful, Respected. No Baggage, No Drama.)
To: ChicagoConservative27
You know the US Supreme Court must really get tired of having to slap the same stupid Democrat tricks down in state after state
20
posted on
10/02/2023 11:47:30 AM PDT
by
MNJohnnie
(Don't blame me, my congressman is MTG!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-38 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson